ANNUAL POWER QUALITY PERFORMANCE

REPORTING SPECIFICATION

FINAL
July 2003
The South African National Electricity Regulator (NER), under the guidance of its Power
Quality Advisory Committee, has developed a framework for the management of power
quality in South Africa. This has been published as a directive of the NER, and addresses the
requirements of both licensees and their customers in dealing with power quality concerns.
Annual reporting by licensees forms a key component of this power quality management
framework. In terms of the Directive, the NER will publish an annual report detailing:

Annual power quality statistics (including comparative and historical trends on power
quality performance).

Complaints statistics (non-conformance reports as well as disputes that have reached the
level of the NER in the context of the Power Quality Management System implemented
by licensees).

Progress of the licensees in implementing their Power Quality Management Systems.

This specification defines the manner in which licensees report their performance statistics,
the monitoring requirements for such reporting, and the publication of the results of this by the
NER. An example format for the NER's annual review report is provided as an annex for
illustrative purposes.
The scope of this specification includes both Eskom Transmission (and the future
independent Transmission Agent), and Distribution licensees (and future RED's).
Licensees are required to implement the requirements of this document.
For queries on the contents of this document please contact Tshilidzi Thenga at:
Email:
Tel. no.:
Cell no.:

Tshilidzi.Thenga@ner.org.za.
(012) 401 4600
082-414-8368

Copies of the Power Quality Directive and Power Quality management System Specification
are available on the NERs web page www.ner.org.za.

Annual Power Quality Performance Reporting Specification

1. GENERAL

1.1. Scope
In terms of the NER Directive on power quality, the NER requires a minimum level of annual
reporting by Distribution licensees and by the Transmission service provider.
The scope of such reporting is:
Voltage quality (voltage magnitude, harmonics, unbalance, flicker)
Voltage disturbances (dips)
Interruption performance
Power quality complaints statistics (see note 1 below)
Instrument statistics and instrument availability data
Progress in terms of the Power Quality management System implementation plans
submitted to the NER
Note 1: Complaints statistics related to Non-Conformance Reports which may arise due to any power quality problem
(e.g. dips, interruptions, harmonics, voltage magnitude, unbalance etc). The process of generating NCR's is defined
generally in terms of the NER Directive, and specifically in terms of the individual licensee Power Quality
Management System Specifications submitted to the NER in July/August 2003.

1.2. Purpose
The agreed purpose of such annual reporting is to:
Establish benchmark statistics (historical and comparative information)
Evaluate long-term trends in the industry (see note 1 below)
Identify specific priorities that need to be addressed from a regulatory point of view
Identify and evaluate the viability of specific potential incentive measures
To ensure that data such as interruption and dip performance data, which cannot be
collected at short notice, is available for decision purposes
Demonstrate to the various stakeholders (government, customers, licensees, and
investors) that aspects pertaining to Power Quality are being managed appropriately.
The NER will publish an annual review of the submission results.
Note 1: Changes in performance trends with time are affected by many parameters (e.g. seasonal changes, network
changes, maintenance practices etc). The underlying nature of these changes needs to be analysed to understand
these trends. The aim of technical reporting is to provide a consistent and transparent foundation for such an
analysis.

1.3. Licensee Annual Reporting Requirements

The first submissions are required in 2004.
Until the establishment of RED's, it is not feasible to require all licensees to provide detailed
reports of statistically monitored technical performance data. For this reason, only licensees
with an annual maximum notified demand in excess of 100 MVA (arithmetic sum of notified
demand at all supply points) are required to provide such data in 2004.
All licensees are required to provide statistics on complaints data and progress in the
implementation of the Power Quality Management System specifications submitted to the
NER in July/August 2003. This data will form one of the considerations for extending
measurements to additional licensees.

Annual Power Quality Performance Reporting Specification

In order to provide a more reflective analysis in the pilot implementation of this specification,
particularly in the context of future RED's, Eskom Distribution is required to report on a
regional basis. Other licensees will not be required to provide a more detailed breakdown.

1.4. Reporting Principles

Actual performance is reported on an annual basis.
The intent is, where possible, for appropriate international measures to be used in the
reporting process so that more meaningful international comparisons can be undertaken.
Where it is recognised that the systems of some licensees do not presently support the
information required by such measures, interim measures are defined.
NRS 048-3:2002 has achieved common agreement on reporting requirements by licensees,
and forms the foundation for this reporting specification. Changes made in this NER reporting
specification reflect specific new requirements of the NER Directive, which was adopted by
the NER after the consultation process on NRS 048-3 was completed. Some of the tables in
NRS 048-3 required for reporting are included in Annex A of this specification to highlight
interpretation issues and communicate modified requirements.
In order to develop a sound perspective for the first annual performance review report, 5-year
retrospective performance from 1999 will be required for technical performance data (i.e. data
reflecting the performance for the calendar years 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, and 2003).
Both permanent and sampled sites are addressed in this reporting specification in the case of
distribution licensees.

1.5. Statistical and Sample Reporting: Data Validation

Reported information for permanent sites may exclude measured data in the following cases:
Where the measurement did not reflect actual quality levels at the measured supply point
(e.g. if the instrument was faulty or the event was due to the instrument being temporarily
disconnected).
Where data has been flagged according to the flagging rules in IEC 61000-4-30 (Note:
where flagging is done outside of the instrument this should be subject to quality audits
from time to time).
Force majeure events as defined in NRS 048-2:2003. Such exclusions shall be
specifically documented in the return.
With the exception of specific exclusions based on the above, "valid data" shall include all
events measured.
Assessment methods applied to statistically monitored data are defined in NRS 048-2:2003.
These shall be used in the reporting process. Any deviations from this shall be specifically
highlighted in the return.

Annual Power Quality Performance Reporting Specification

2. TRANSMISSION REPORTING
2.1. Overview
The transmission system plays an important role in national and regional power quality
performance, particularly in the case of HV customers. Trend reporting and comparative
reporting of the performance to the various RED's is therefore important as a foundation for
the new power quality management framework. For power quality reporting purposes,
delivery point indices are used for voltage quality, dips, and interruption reporting.

2.2. Requirements
In terms of the NER Power Quality Directive, the following power quality monitoring
requirements apply to the transmission licensee:
2.2.1

Statistical monitoring
All permanent transmission supply points shall be monitored on a continuous basis
(see notes 1 and 2 below). A supply point is defined as the geographical point at which the
distribution licensee or direct customer takes power, or where more practical, the
closest point agreed between the transmission licensee and the affected distribution
licensee or direct customer(s). In general this will be a transmission substation.
Where multiple delivery points are associated with a transmission supply point, at
least one delivery point shall be monitored (see notes 3 and 4 below). Where agreement
cannot be reached between the transmission licensee and the distribution licensee,
the NER will rule on the point to be monitored. In some cases the transmission
licensee and the distribution licensee may wish to share a power quality monitoring
device. In this case, the transmission licensee shall maintain all its obligations with
regard to data reporting and data quality.

2.2.2.

Sample monitoring
Some sites specified by the NER may require periodic sample measurements for a
minimum period (e.g. of one week in the case of voltage quality parameters). This is
typically foreseen where concessions have been made by the NER to allow relaxed
power quality levels, and where permanent monitoring is not in place (e.g. for
parameters such as flicker that do not require permanent monitoring, or sites that
have been agreed with the NER not to be permanently monitored). Sample recording
may also in future be required for transmission delivery points that are not
permanently monitored.

2.2.2

Complaints monitoring
Some sites specified by the NER may require measurements for a minimum period of
one week in order to resolve complaints or disputes related to voltage waveform
problems.

Note 1. Deviations from this requirement may be requested from the NER on a site-for-site basis.
Note 2. Where supply points are temporarily in place (i.e. less than 6 months), monitoring is not required.
Note 3. Because most Transmission dip reporting is related to the supply network, where multiple busbars (or voltage
levels) exist in a substation, monitoring of one such busbar would be sufficient to define Transmission dip
performance.
Note 4. The choice of the measurement point should be based on maximising the value added to the power quality
management process as defined in the NER Directive. As a guideline for multiple delivery points and a single monitor
at the transmission supply point, the delivery point selected for monitoring should be the one most likely to present
problems (e.g. where capacitors are connected), or where the majority of sensitive customers are supplied.

Annual Power Quality Performance Reporting Specification

2.3. Data (instrumentation) availability for statistical reporting purposes

2.3.1.

Total data availability

The total data availability for all permanently monitored sites for statistical reporting
shall be better than 99% (this availability is defined as the total number of hours that
all permanent sites were monitored according to the appropriate standards, divided
by the total number of hours for the year for all these sites).

2.3.2.

Individual site data availability

In addition to total data availability, where data communications is available no
individual transmission supply point shall remain unmonitored according to the above
requirements for more than 1 month continuously, and 6 weeks in the case of sites
with no data communications facility. Sites where this requirement is not met should
be recorded in the annual submission to the NER.

2.4. Reported Data: Annual Statistical Reporting

2.4.1.

Voltage Quality Statistics

The following voltage quality statistics shall be reported by the licensee:
Voltage harmonics (format according to NRS 048-3:2002 Table 9)
Voltage unbalance (format according to NRS 048-3:2002 Table 10)
Voltage magnitude (format according to NRS 048-3:2002 Table 12)
Voltage quality data is reported as the number of exceedance periods per site over
the reporting period. An exceedance period shall be considered as having occurred
when the assessed 95% weekly value exceeds the appropriate requirements in NRS
048-2:2003 (note 1). A weekly assessed value shall be determined on a daily basis for
the previous 7 days, starting with the first 10 minute value after 00h00 on the first day.
For clarity, the first weekly value for the reporting year shall be calculated on 1
January of the current reporting year.
Note 1. In the case of voltage magnitude, the number of exceedance periods of the magnitude limit value
shall also be reported.

2.4.2.

Voltage Dip Statistics

Voltage dip statistics (number of measured events) for X1, X2, S, T, Z1 and Z2 dips
(defined in NRS 048-2:2003) shall be reported per site on an annual basis (format
according to table 11 of NRS 048-3:2002). Two statistics shall be reported against
each of these dip types, i.e. the total number of events, and transmission-caused
events only.

2.4.3.

Interruption Statistics
The following delivery point interruption statistics shall be reported by the licensee:
SAIFI-MI: momentary interruptions - excluding MV tertiary supplies
SAIFI-SI: sustained interruptions - excluding MV tertiary supplies
SAIDI - sustained interruptions excluding MV tertiary supplies
SAIRI - sustained interruptions excluding MV tertiary supplies
Total system minutes for events of degree severity < 1
Number of system minute events of degrees 0, 1, 2, and 3 (bulk supply system)
Number of system minutes of degrees 0, 1, 2, and 3 (local system events)
Generation / transmission initiated load shed events
A description of individual events that resulted in a system minute count of > 1.
The number of transmission supply points and delivery points

Annual Power Quality Performance Reporting Specification

The definitions applied for an interruption, a momentary interruption, and a load shed
event shall be those documented in NRS 048-2:2003.
The following definitions apply for national statistics:

SAIFI - SI =

Total number of sustained delivery/reception point interruptions

Total number of transmission delivery and reception points

SAIFI - MI =

Total number of momentary delivery/reception point interruptions

Total number of transmission delivery and reception points

SAIDI =

Sum of all sustained delivery/reception point interruption durations

Total number of transmission delivery and reception points

SAIRI =

Sum of all sustained delivery/reception point interruption durations

Total number of sustained delivery/reception point interruptions

The above indices shall be reported with and without the inclusion of major events
(defined as bulk system events of 1 minute and more - see table below). On the
establishment of RED's, the performance applicable to the delivery points to each
RED shall be reported separately for the above indices.
The following definition of system minutes shall be applied:

System Minute =

Total Estimated Unsupplied Energy (MWh)x 60

System annual peak demand for the period

The degree of severity for individual measures is defined in the table below.
Table 2.1- Bulk Electricity System (BES) and local severity measures.

Degree
Description
Severity
0
- unreliability condition normally considered
acceptable
1
- significant impact on one ore more
customers but not considered serious
- impact less that 10 times that acceptable
2
- serious impact on customers
- impact considered 10 to 100 times that
acceptable
3
- a very serious impact on customers
- impact considered more than 100 times
that acceptable

2.4.4

BES
(SM)
<1

Local
(MW.min)
< 1000

1-9

1000 - 9999

10-99

10000 - 99999

>= 100

>= 100000

Complaints: NCR and Dispute Statistics

The licensee shall provide annual statistics on NCR's and disputes according to Table
B.2. in Annex B.

2.4.5

Quality Management System Implementation

The licensee shall provide feedback on the milestones identified in the submission to
the NER of July/August 2003, and any additional requirements communicated by the
NER in response to this submission.
Annual Power Quality Performance Reporting Specification

2.5. Interpretation
In order to facilitate the review process by the NER, the licensee shall provide information on:
Any changes in monitoring or reporting philosophy (e.g. interpretation of indices).
Any specific information excluded from the indices reported, with reasons for this
Known reasons for specific performance degradation / improvement against any of the
reported indices.
Interventions identified or implemented to address specific performance issues.

Annual Power Quality Performance Reporting Specification

3. DISTRIBUTION LICENSEE REPORTING

3.1. Overview
It is not appropriate from a cost, technical, and logistical point of view to specify a power
quality monitoring requirement that achieves full statistical accuracy in reporting distribution
licensee power quality performance (disturbance and voltage quality parameters). The
random placement required by such a statistical sample may also not provide optimal value in
terms of managing the levels of quality on the network. The selection of monitoring sites by
distribution licensees is therefore based not on statistical criteria, but on the selection by the
licensee of sites to be monitored that best achieve the goal of managing quality levels.
Comparative reporting of the results of such statistical monitoring is therefore not appropriate.
Trend reporting is more appropriate (see note 1 below).
Note 1: Changes in performance trends with time are affected by many parameters (e.g. seasonal changes, network
changes, maintenance practices etc). The underlying nature of these changes needs to be analysed to understand
these trends. The aim of technical reporting is to provide a consistent and transparent foundation for such an
analysis.

3.2. Statistical Reporting

In terms of the NER Power Quality Directive, the following monitoring requirements apply to
distribution licensees:
3.2.1.

Statistical monitoring
The permanent instrumentation requirements for statistical monitoring are defined in
NRS 048-3:2003. In some cases the transmission licensee and the distribution
licensee may choose to share a common power quality monitoring device at an
interface point. In this case, the distribution licensee shall maintain all its obligations
with regard to data reporting and data quality as stipulated by the directive. The
distribution licensee shall select the most appropriate set of sites to meet the
statistical monitoring requirements. The selection of these sites shall be based on
providing the best basis for managing power quality performance in terms of the
power quality management framework in the NER Directive. It is accepted that the
sites chosen may reflect a bias towards poorer performing sites. This will be
highlighted in the NER's annual performance review.

3.2.2.

Sample monitoring
Some sites specified by the NER will require periodic sample measurements for a
minimum period (e.g. of one week in the case of voltage quality parameters). This is
typically foreseen where concessions have been made by the NER to allow relaxed
power quality levels, and where permanent monitoring is not in place (e.g. for
parameters such as flicker that do not require permanent monitoring, and sites that
have been agreed with the NER not to be permanently monitored).

3.2.3.

Complaints monitoring
Some sites will require measurements for a period of at least one week in order to
demonstrate compliance where a complaint has been lodged by a customer. Such
monitoring will form the basis of the "validated complaints" statistics defined below.

Annual Power Quality Performance Reporting Specification

3.3. Instrument availability for statistical reporting purposes

2.3.3.

Total data availability

The total data availability for all permanently monitored sites for statistical reporting
shall be better than 95% (this availability is defined as the total number of hours that
all permanent sites were monitored according to the appropriate standards, divided
by the total number of hours for the year for all monitored sites).

2.3.4.

Individual site data availability

In addition to total data availability, where data communications is available no
individual transmission supply point shall remain unmonitored according to the above
requirements for more than 1 month continuously, and 6 weeks in the case of sites
with no data communications facility. Sites where this requirement is not met should
be recorded in the annual submission to the NER.

2.4. Reported Data: Annual Statistical Reporting

2.4.1.

Voltage Quality Statistics: Permanently Monitored Sites

The following voltage quality statistics shall be reported by the licensee:
Voltage harmonics (format according to NRS 048-3:2002 Table 9)
Voltage unbalance (format according to NRS 048-3:2002 Table 10)
Voltage magnitude (format according to NRS 048-3:2002 Table 12)
Voltage quality data is reported as the number of exceedance periods per site over
the reporting period. An exceedance period shall be considered as having occurred
when the assessed 95% weekly value exceeds the appropriate requirements in NRS
048-2:2003 (note 1). A weekly assessed value shall be determined on a daily basis for
the previous 7 days, starting with the first 10 minute value after 00h00 on the first day.
For clarity, the first weekly value for the reporting year shall be calculated on 1
January of the current reporting year.
Note 1. In the case of voltage magnitude, the number of exceedance periods of the magnitude limit value
shall also be reported.

2.4.2.

Voltage Quality Statistics: Validated Customer Complaints

The licensee shall provide annual statistics on the number of validated customer
complaints for the reporting year according to Table B.1. in Annex B.
A validated customer complaint is defined as a complaint that is found upon
investigation to be accompanied by an exceedance of the voltage waveform quality
requirements in NRS-048-2 (i.e. the compatibility levels or limits defined for voltage
magnitude, harmonics, unbalance, flicker). Such an investigation may include a
known network condition giving rise to such an event, measurement data from a
permanently installed instrument (note 1), or measurements conducted for the purpose
of resolving the complaint at or close to the supply point for at least one week (note 2).
Note 1. Should a complaint be verified by measured data from a site not at the customer supply point, a
measurement at the supply point is not required. The complaint is then counted as a verified complaint.
Note 2. Should a complaint be verified by a measurement of less than one week, the full week
measurement is not required. The complaint is then counted as a verified complaint.

Annual Power Quality Performance Reporting Specification

2.4.3.

Voltage Dip Statistics

Voltage dip statistics (number of measured events) for X1, X2, S, T, Z1 and Z2 dips
(defined in NRS 048-2:2003) shall be reported per site on an annual basis (format
according to table 11 of NRS 048-3:2002). Two statistics shall be reported against
each of these dip types, i.e. the total number of events, and transmission-caused
events only.

2.4.4.

Interruption Statistics
Licensees shall report interruption performance separately for HV and MV systems
using the following indices:
SAIFI
SAIDI
CAIDI
Forced Interruption Index / Supply Loss Index (NRS 048-3:2003)
Some licensees do not use SAIFI, SAIDI, and CAIDI internally and are at this stage
unable to make reasonable estimates of the number of customers affected by an
interruption. These licensees may provide only the annual interruption statistics
according to tables 14 - 17 in NRS 048-3:2002 up to the year 2005.
The following definitions apply (see note 1):

SAIFI =

Number of Interrupted Customers for Each Interruption Event

SAIDI =

Customer Interruption Durations

CAIDI =

Total Number of Customers Served

Total Number of Customers Served

Customer Interruption Durations

Number of Interrupted Customers for Each Interruption Event

Note that:

CAIDI =

SAIDI
SAIFI

Note 1. IEEE-1366 standard on distribution reliability is to be completed in 2003. This shall form the
guideline for the calculation of the above interruption indices (e.g. the calculation of SAIDI and CAIDI in the
case of stepped restoration). Use of this standard will ensure international compatibility of reported
interruption performance.

The above indices shall be reported with and without the inclusion of major incidents.
The statistical method for identifying if an indicnet is a "major incident" or not, shall be
the method applied in IEEE-1366.
2.5.5.

Complaints: NCR and Dispute Statistics

The licensee shall provide annual statistics on NCR's and disputes according to Table
B.2. in Annex B.

Annual Power Quality Performance Reporting Specification

10

2.5.6.

Quality Management System Implementation

The licensee shall provide feedback on the milestones identified in the submission to
the NER of July/August 2003, and any additional requirements communicated by the
NER in response to this submission.

2.5. Interpretation
In order to facilitate the review process by the NER, the licensee shall provide information on:
Any changes in monitoring or reporting philosophy (e.g. interpretation of indices).
Any specific information excluded from the indices reported, with reasons for this
Known reasons for specific performance degradation / improvement against any of the
reported indices.
Interventions identified or implemented to address specific performance issues.

Annual Power Quality Performance Reporting Specification

11

4. NER ANNUAL POWER QUALITY PERFORMANCE REVIEW

4.1. Overview
The annual performance review published by the NER will, where appropriate:
Report comparative and trended information for voltage waveform quality, voltage dips,
interruptions, and complaints statistics.
Provide a fair and informed assessment of performance trends in the industry
Reflect proposed interventions by licensees, where appropriate.
Report on levels of compliance to the NER Directive by licensees.
Highlight potential issues that can be addressed by specific regulatory interventions of the
NER.

4.2. Process and Timetable

The following process and timetable will be implemented in publishing the report:
28 February
Receipt of licensee returns for the previous calendar year
31 March
Compilation of a draft performance report by the NER
30 April
Receipt of licensee comments on the draft report
31 May
Workshop the report and comments with the Advisory Committee
30 June
Publish Annual Power Quality Performance Review Report

4.3. Submission Process

To facilitate the submission process, the NER will:
Provide the copies of submission formats.
Institute a simple help system for dealing with queries on the reporting requirements
Track and manage overdue submissions.

4.4. Accuracy of Reported Data

The NER may elect to undertake audits on annual submissions where appropriate during the
period end February to May.
The annual statistics shall be signed by the CEO (or equivalent) as being true and correct to
his/her best knowledge.

4.5. Auditing
In terms of the Power Quality Directive the NER may commission periodic audits of the quality
assurance systems in place in the various licensees. This will be in accordance to a defined
audit plan.
An important component of this audit is an assessment of the practices used by licensees in
recording and reporting statistics in terms of this specification, as it is important that this is
done accurately, consistently and uniformly.

Annual Power Quality Performance Reporting Specification

12

ANNEX A: LICENSEE REPORTING (ADJUSTMENTS TO NRS 048-3:2003)

A.1. Declaration of sites
The table below lists the NRS 048-3:2002 instrument requirements for a distribution licensee
(note that according to NRS 048-3:2002 and this specification, a transmission licensee is
required to monitor all sites).

Table A.1. Declaration of sites: Transmission

Transmission Sites
Sites permanently monitored
No.
Substation

Total number of sites______

Busbar

Voltage (kV)

Customer/RED

History (yrs)
(Note 1)

Table A.2. Declaration of sites: Distribution

Distribution Sites
Sites permanently monitored
No.
Substation

Total number of sites______

Busbar

Voltage (kV)

Site category

History (yrs)
(Note 1)

Note 1: Installed for more than 6 months in a year

Annual Power Quality Performance Reporting Specification

13

A.2. Reporting Tables According to NRS 048-3:2003

Specific NRS 048-3:2003 reporting tables referred to in this document, are included for below
clarity. Specific changes introduced since the publication of NRS 048-3:2002, as well as
interpretation issues are addressed as notes accompanying the tables .

Note 1: With the introduction of weekly reporting in NRS 048-2:2003, Column 6 shall be interpreted as the weekly
95% value (i.e. the 7 days up to the date that the value is logged) being exceeded. Note that a new weekly value is
calculated at the end of every day.
Note 2: In the case of MV systems, the comparison in column 6 shall be made with the compatibility level.
Note 3: For reporting purposes, a minimum requirement is that harmonic voltage orders 3,5,7,11, and 13 shall be
compared to the planning/compatibility levels (column 5). Where more than one is exceeded in the reporting year,
th
th
each of these shall be listed (e.g. THD, 5 and 11 ).
Note 4: The instrument location shall be the substation name, and busbar (where multiple busbars exist).

Note 1: With the introduction of weekly reporting in NRS 048-2:2003, Column 5 shall be interpreted as the weekly
95% value (i.e. the 7 days up to the date that the value is logged) being exceeded. The weekly value is calculated on
a daily basis.
Note 2: The instrument location shall be the substation name, and busbar (where multiple busbars exist).

Note 1: With the revision of NRS 048-2 (2003), the above table shall reflect all the new dip categories (X1, X2, S, T,
Z1, and Z2), but exclude Y-type dips.

Annual Power Quality Performance Reporting Specification

14

Note 2: The nominal voltage in column 4 shall refer t the voltage at which the instrument is connected.

Annual Power Quality Performance Reporting Specification

15

ANNEX B: COMPLAINTS REPORTING (NEW REQUIREMENTS)

B.1. Validated Voltage Quality Complaints
Table B.1. Validated customer complaints (Distribution Licensees)

Voltage Waveform Quality: Validated Retail Customer Complaints

Urban
Customer Category
Residential
Agricultural
Commercial
Industrial
Bulk

LV

Rural
MV

LV

MV

HV

B.2. Complaints: Non-conformance Reports (NCR's)

Table B.2. Submission of complaints statistics (NCR's and formal Disputes lodged with the NER)

Complaint statistics as at 31 December (NCR's and formal Disputes)

Customer
Complaint
Reference No.

Customer
Name

Customer
Category
Code

Complaint
Category
Code(s)

NCR
Date
Initiated

Dispute
Date
Initiated*

Date
Resolved*

* Note: Where a date is not applicable, please type "X"

Customer Category Code: (e.g. R01)

Complaint Category Code: (e.g. 03)

R
U
N

Rural
Urban
Not defined

01
02
03
04
05
06
07

Industrial
Commercial
Agricultural
Residential
Re-distributor
Various (group action)
Other

01
02
03
04
05
06
07

Interruptions
Voltage dips
Voltage magnitude
Voltage unbalance
Voltage harmonics
Voltage flicker
Other

Annual Power Quality Performance Reporting Specification

16

ANNEX C: EXAMPLE OF ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REVIEW REPORT

(The format below illustrates the processing of the data received by the NER and the manner
in which this will be communicated in the annual report. It is not intended to be reflective of
actual performance - all values and statistics are illustrative).

Statistical Performance Reporting: Transmission

Background
The quality delivered by the Transmission Grid provides a foundation for the quality delivered
by regional distributors. The Transmission Operator provides annual reports on performance
of the national grid with regard to voltage waveform quality (voltage magnitude, harmonics,
and unbalance), voltage dips, and interruption performance.
Sites Monitored
Statistical reporting is provided for monitoring sites out of a total of .. Transmission
delivery points. The delivery points not reported on are not monitored for the following
reasons: ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
The total availability of the power quality monitors was ..% for the year ending 31
December. This (exceeds/is below) the target of 99%.
Waveform Quality
Voltage waveform quality is managed by setting limits on the deviation of the voltage from the
ideal 50Hz sinusoidal waveform. For transmission delivery points, these limits are based on
planning levels in NRS-048-2 or by agreement with customer.
Waveform quality is affected by both the operation of the transmission grid and by the
combined effect of customers connected to the grid. It is therefore difficult to guarantee that a
specific site will not exceed the limits in any given year. From a regulatory point of view, a
target for all sites is that no more than 5% of sites should exceed the agreed levels and limits.
What is important is that a specific site does not remain continuously outside of the limits (i.e.
that action is taken by the system operator to address problems). The sites that exceeded
the agreed levels are reported annually.
Transmission Voltage Magnitude Performance

Percentage of Sites

14%
Exceeding Agreed Levels
Exceeding Limits
Target

12%
10%
8%
6%
4%
2%
0%
1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

Year

Figure 3 Voltage magnitude performance and trend (percentage of sites exceeded).

Annual Power Quality Performance Reporting Specification

17

Figure 1 shows the annual number of sites exceeding the voltage magnitude limits. Figure 2
shows the annual number of sites exceeding the voltage magnitude limits for 2 years
consecutive years (target 2%) and 3 consecutive years respectively (target 0%).
Voltage Dip Performance: Transmission Caused Dips
NRS-048-2:2003 has defined characterisatic dip performance in terms of dip windows and
statistics based on the 95 percentile of sites and 50 percentile of sites. The dip performance
at Transmission supply points is shown below for the reporting year and the average
performance since 1998. This performance reflects dips caused by events on the
transmission network only. The site sample is . HV sites and .. EHV sites.
Table 1 Number of voltage dips per year for each category of dip window (95% of sites)
Network voltage range
(nominal voltages)
> 44 kV to 132 kV
220 kV to 765 kV

Number of voltage dips per year

Dip window category
X2
T
S
Z1
35
25
40
40
24
24
24
24
30
20
20
10
24
24
24
24

X1
35
24
30
24

Z2
10
24
5
24

Table 2 Number of voltage dips per year for each category of dip window (50% of sites)
Network voltage range
(nominal voltages)
> 44 kV to 132 kV
220 kV to 765 kV

Number of voltage dips per year

Dip window category
X2
T
S
Z1
10
5
7
4
24
24
24
24
9
3
2
1
24
24
24
24

X1
13
24
8
24

Z2
2
24
1
24

Voltage dip performance is strongly influenced by annual weather patterns, and for this
reason a year-on-year comparison of dip performance is not a good indication of actual
performance trends (particularly in the case of a single site). The figure below shows the
trend in the 3-year average for the various dip categories. The average represents the
average number of dips seen by all sites over a three year period ending at the year
indicated.
HV Dip Performance Trend (Average over a 3-year window)
50
45

Number of dips

40
X1
X2
S
T
Z1
Z2

35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
2000

2001

2002

2003

Reporting Year

Figure 2 National dip performance trend: transmission-caused dips only.

Annual Power Quality Performance Reporting Specification

18

Comparative Dip Performance

50
45

Number of Dips

40
35
30
25
20
15
10

RED6 Z2

RED5 Z2

RED4 Z2

RED3 Z2

RED2 Z2

RED1 Z2

RED6 Z1

RED5 Z1

RED4 Z1

RED3 Z1

RED6 S

RED2 Z1

RED5 S

RED1 Z1

RED4 S

RED3 S

RED6 T

RED2 S

RED5 T

RED1 S

RED4 T

RED3 T

RED2 T

RED1 T

RED6 X2

RED5 X2

RED4 X2

RED3 X2

RED2 X2

RED1 X2

RED6 X1

RED4 x1

RED5 X1

RED3 X1

RED2 X1

RED1 X1

Figure 3 Comparative dip statistics (range per dip category per RED): transmission-caused
dips only.

Provincial Boundaries
Population
0 - 50000
50000 - 100000
100000 - 400000
400000 - 1000000
1000000 - 2800000

200

200

400 Kilometers

Figure 4 National dip performance statistics at Transmission supply points

(including/excluding dips caused by distribution licensees).

Transmission Interruptions (Average number of events per annum)

The average number of interruptions seen by each of the Transmission delivery and reception
(generation) points is shown below for the total Transmission system.

Annual Power Quality Performance Reporting Specification

19

Transmission SAIFI (National)

0.45
0.4
0.35

SAIFI

0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

Year

Figure 5 SAIFI (System Average Interruption Frequency Index):

National System (all supply and reception points).
The average number of interruptions seen by each of the Transmission delivery and reception
(generation) points is shown below for each of the RED's and for generation connected to the
Transmission system.
Transmission SAIFI (Comparative)
0.4
0.35

SAIFI

0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
RED 1 RED 2 RED 3 RED 4 RED 5 RED 6

GEN

Figure 6 SAIFI (System Average Interruption Frequency Index):

Supply to Regional Distributors
.
Transmission Interruptions (Average duration per supply point)
The average number of interruptions seen by each of the Transmission delivery and reception
(generation) points is shown below for the total Transmission system.
(SAIDI as for SAIFI).
Transmission Interruptions (Average restoration time per interruption)
The average number of interruptions seen by each of the Transmission delivery and reception
(generation) points is shown below for the total Transmission system.
(SAIRI as for SAIFI).
Transmission Interruptions (Severity: small interruptions)
(SM<1 as for SAIFI).

Annual Power Quality Performance Reporting Specification

20

Transmission Interruptions (Severity: major interruptions)

Major system interruptions are categorised according to bulk electricity system (BES) events
(e.g. cascading faults affecting a loarge area) and localised events (e.g. failure of a local
transformer).
Table 3- Bulk Electricity System (BES) and local severity measures.

Degree
Description
Severity
0
- unreliability condition normally considered
acceptable
1
- significant impact on one ore more
customers but not considered serious
- impact less that 10 times that acceptable
2
- serious impact on customers
- impact considered 10 to 100 times that
acceptable
3
- a very serious impact on customers
- impact considered more than 100 times
that acceptable
Table 4: Bulk System Interruptions

Local
(MW.min)
< 1000

1-9

1000 - 9999

10-99

10000 - 99999

>= 100

>= 100000

Table 5: Local Interruptions (>1000MW.min)

Degree 1 Degree 2 Degree 3

1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003

BES
(SM)
<1

Degree 1 Degree 2 Degree 3

1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003

Statistical Performance Reporting: Distribution Licensees

Background
The permanently-installed distribution sites are not a statistically reflective sample.
Distribution licensees are encouraged to place power quality instruments at locations in the
network that meet optimal power quality management needs. This may result in a tendency
for "bad", rather than good sites to be selected for permanent monitoring purposes, or for
sites with sensitive customers to be prioritised.
The results reported in this chapter therefore focus on performance trends.

Annual Power Quality Performance Reporting Specification

21

Sites Monitored
The table below lists the number of sites permanently monitored by each of the licensees.
Table 6. HV network instrument statistics.
RED
Magnitude
Unbalance
1
2
3
4
5
6
Table 7. MV network instrument statistics.
RED
Magnitude
Unbalance
1
2
3
4
5
6

HV
Harmonics

Dips

Availibility
92%
95%
97%
99%
96%
92%

MV
Harmonics

Dips

Availibility
92%
95%
97%
99%
96%
92%

The minimum requirement for instrument availability is 95%.

Voltage Waveform Quality
Voltage waveform quality is managed by setting limits on the deviation of the voltage from the
ideal 50Hz sinusoidal waveform. For HV points, these limits are based on planning levels in
NRS-048-2. For MV and LV supply points, these are based on the relevant compatibility
levels and limits specified in NRS-048-2..
The lack of a statistically representative (random) sample of measurement points makes the
accurate reporting of voltage waveform quality performance difficult for distribution licensees.
In order to assess the manner by which utilities are managing voltage waveform quality proactively, a measure has been introduced which assesses the number of complaints that are
correlated with voltage waveform quality problems.
Such "verified" complaints are
determined by assessing the compliance of the licensee with the provisions of NRS-048-2.
Waveform quality is affected by the operation and design of the supply network, and by the
combined effect of customers connected to the network. It is therefore difficult to guarantee
that a specific site will not exceed the limits in any given year. A certain number of "verified"
complaints may therefore expected. It is the licensee's responsibility to address these
problems. Recurring problems and lack of action by the licensee to address these problems
are likely to result in Non-Conformance Reports in terms of the Quality Management System
of the licensee. Such statistics are also reported annual by licensees.
Figure 1 shows the number of verified complaints per 1000 customers for each of the
customer categories.

Annual Power Quality Performance Reporting Specification

22

Verified Voltage Waveform Quality Complaints

No. Per 1000 Customers

25
Rural
Urban

20
15
10
5
0
1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

Year

Figure 7 National waveform quality performance trend

(verified complaints).

No. Per 1000 Customers

25

Verified Voltage Waveform Quality Complaints

(Compatative: 2003)
Rural
Urban
Rural (national)

20
15
10
5
0
RED 1

RED 2

RED 3

RED 4

RED 5

RED 6

Year

Figure 8 Comparative waveform quality performance trend

(verified complaints).
In the case of permanently monitored sites, the number of sites exceeding the planning levels
/ compatibility levels are shown below.
(see figure 3)
Voltage Dip Performance: Distribution Licensee
NRS-048-2:2003 has defined characterisatic dip performance in terms of dip windows and
statistics based on the 95 percentile of sites and 50 percentile of sites. The updated national
dip performance is shown below for the reporting year and the average performance since
1998. This performance reflects dips caused by events on the transmission network and
within the distribution licensee networks. The total site sample is . HV sites and .. EHV
sites.
Table 8 Number of voltage dips per year for each category of dip window (95% of sites)
Network voltage range
(nominal voltages)

X1

Number of voltage dips per year

Dip window category
X2
T
S
Z1

Annual Power Quality Performance Reporting Specification

Z2

23

As per part 3
(*NOTE NRS-Part 3 does not
require)
> 44 kV to 132 kV

35
24

35
24

25
24

40
24

40
24

10
24

30
24

30
24

20
24

20
24

10
24

5
24

Table 9 Number of voltage dips per year for each category of dip window (50% of sites)
Network voltage range
(nominal voltages)
As per part 3
> 44 kV to 132 kV

Number of voltage dips per year

Dip window category
X2
T
S
Z1
10
5
7
4
24
24
24
24
9
3
2
1
24
24
24
24

X1
13
24
8
24

Z2
2
24
1
24

Note that these statistics reflect the dip performance for sites with an annual data availability
as per NER requirements. Where 100% availability was not achieved, the data has been
annualised.
Voltage dip performance is strongly influenced by annual weather patterns, and for this
reason a year-on-year comparison of dip performance is not a good indication of actual
performance trends (particularly in the case of a single site). The figure below shows the
trend in the 3-year average for the various dip categories. The average represents the
average number of dips seen by all sites over a three year period ending at the year
indicated.
HV Dip Performance Trend (Average over a 3-year window)
50
45

Number of dips

40
X1
X2
S
T
Z1
Z2

35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
2000

2001

2002

2003

Reporting Year

Figure 10 National dip performance trend (all monitored sites).

Annual Power Quality Performance Reporting Specification

24

Comparative Dip Performance

50
45

Number of Dips

40
35
30
25
20
15
10

RED6 Z2

RED5 Z2

RED4 Z2

RED3 Z2

RED2 Z2

RED1 Z2

RED6 Z1

RED5 Z1

RED4 Z1

RED3 Z1

RED6 S

RED2 Z1

RED5 S

RED1 Z1

RED4 S

RED3 S

RED6 T

RED2 S

RED5 T

RED1 S

RED4 T

RED3 T

RED2 T

RED1 T

RED6 X2

RED5 X2

RED4 X2

RED3 X2

RED2 X2

RED1 X2

RED4 x1

RED6 X1

RED5 X1

RED3 X1

RED2 X1

RED1 X1

Figure 11 Comparative dip statistics (range per dip category per RED): all dips at
transmission delivery points.

A Review of Complaint Statistics

Background
The NER uses statistics provided by licensees on the number of Non-Conformance Reports
(NCR's) raised in the reporting year to assess areas where specific problems exist, and to
track the resolution of these. It is anticipated that for at least the next 3 years the number of
NCR's will increase as customers become aware of their rights in terms of the NER Directive,
and as licencees build the capacity and skills to deal with the complaints process. As such, an
increase in these figures alone should not be interpreted as a negative trend in licensee
performance. An important statistic is the number of disputes not resolved within 6 months,
as this indicates that the industry is not dealing effectively with customer complaints.
(Resolution by the NER of a dispute is a negotiated or arbitrated decision on the resolution to
the problem. Resolution of an NCR is an agreement between the licensee and the customer
on solving the problem.)
Non-Conformance Reports and Dispute Statistics
NCR Resolved
NCR Unresolved
Dispute Resolved
Dispute Unresolved

etc

Licensee

RED 3

RED 2

RED 1

TX

10

15

20

25

Number

Types of Complaints Resulting in NCR's

An important role of NCR and Dispute statistics is to identify problems areas in which
stakeholders (licensees, the NER, customers, and equipment suppliers) have problems in
Annual Power Quality Performance Reporting Specification

25

meeting customer requirements. Based on an analysis of the annual returns, the NER
Advisory Committee will address specific problems by considering aspects such as improved
standards, specific requirements of licensees, improved communication, and the identification
of precedents.
The highest majority (e.g 60%) of all NCR's are in (e.g. rural) or "undefined" areas. Most of
these (e.g. 80%) were related to either dips or interruptions. Industrial and agricultural
customers make up the majority of complainants (70%).
The total number of disputes unresolved for greater than 6 months was 5. The reason for the
difficulties in resolving disputes is .
The above indicators highlight a need for the Power Quality Advisory Committee to address
the following quality issues in the coming year:
- Improved interruption performance in rural areas with ,,,,, industry

NCR and Customer Categories

10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1

Other

Various (group action)

Residential

Re-distributor

Agricultural

Industrial

Complaint Category

Commercial

Flicker

Other

Unbalance

Harmonics

Dips

Voltage

Interruptions

Customer Category

Results of Dispute Resolutions

The results of dispute arbitrations may provide potential precedents for similar future
customer complaints. The following rulings / or agreement between the parties may be
highlighted for the reporting year:
- (e.g. where a customer is informed of the levels of dip performance and fails to take
adequate precaution against these in the design process..)
- .

Conformance to the Requirements of the NER PQ Directive

Background
The NER Directive requires each licensee to have in place a Quality Management System
that meets minimum requirements specified by the Power Quality Advisory Committee
(document ref.). This is a licence condition of each of the licensees. Conformance to these
requirements is verified by the NER, where necessary, through consultation with the Power
Quality Advisory Committee.
Licensee Quality Management Systems
As at 31 December, certificates of compliance were maintained by . Licensees.
Licensees remain only partially compliant, and . Licensees are not compliant.
Annual Power Quality Performance Reporting Specification

26

Compliance audits undertaken by the NER on a sample of licensees have revealed the
following trends in the implementation of quality management systems:
Itemised .
Fines Issued By The NER
A core requirement of the Quality Management System is that licensees maintain records of
formal customer complaints. Where such records are found not to have been kept when a
dispute is escalated to the NER, the NER may issue a fine of up to R. In the
reporting year, the following fines were issued:
Itemised .
Audit Results
In the reporting year, the NER has undertaken audits of the Quality Management Systems of
the licensees in accordance with the audit plan drawn up by the Power Quality Advisory
Committee.
Itemised .

Annual Power Quality Performance Reporting Specification

27

ANNEX E: ANALYSIS OF REPORTED RESULTS

Generic Format
Background
The generic analysis of annual performance returns is based on assessing:
Historical trends
Comparative performance.
Structure

Na
ti o
na
l

Lic
en
se
e
A
Lic
en
se
e
B
Lic
en
se
e
N

The structure of this is illustrated in the diagram below for distribution licensees (future
RED's). In the case of Transmission, the same analysis is proposed - where the "licensee"
column will represent the regional performance (i.e. Transmission performance to a particular
RED).

Year 1

Comparative Performance

Year 2

current year n
average m years

Year n
A

Average

B ..N

National

Licensee

(m years)
Performance Trend
licensee
national (year n)
licensee trend
national trend

2 ..n
Year

Figure G.1 Generic structure of the analysis of data.

The following may be noted:
The average over m years is for a user-defined number of years.
The rule for the calculation of the national statistic may be different for different
parameters. In some cases (such as transmission returns) this will be provided by the
licensee (i.e. does not need to be calculated from the individual performance).

Annual Power Quality Performance Reporting Specification

28

ANNEX E: GLOSSARY OF TERMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

IR
NER
NCR
PQ
PQMS

Incident Report
National Electricity Regulator
Non-Conformance Report
Power Quality
Power Quality Management System

Annual Power Quality Performance Reporting Specification

29